Beyond the now well-known Nutri-Score, labels have proliferated on food products in the last decade. Working as nudges, labels offer easy-to-process information to enhance the quality of food decision making. In this regard, multi-labelling (i.e. the display of more than one label on the packaging) can be effective or counterproductive when it harms one of the labels’ value, in particular when the information provided displays both positive and negative valences. Thus, the question of the quantity and the univalence of the information provided is at stake. To bridge this gap, in this research, we investigate the impact of the addition of an Eco-Score (alternatively good or bad) to a good Nutri-Score on consumers’ food behaviour. To do so, we conducted an online between-subjects experiment comparing 3 conditions: (1) a Nutri-Score A, (2) a combination of Nutri-Score A and Eco-Score B, (3) a combination of Nutri-Score A and Eco-Score E. Our results indicate that multi-labelling is a double-edged sword: while the addition of an Eco-Score B enhances warm-glow which increases purchase intentions among the most ecology-sensitive consumers, the addition of an Eco-Score E confuses consumers. As such, consumers respond to multi-labelling through two different routes, both emotional and cognitive, depending on the scores valences. Based on these results, we contribute to several streams of literature (multi-labelling, consumer confusion and information processing) and provide recommendations to food managers as well as public policy makers
Dorisse, A., Charry, K., Parguel, B., & et al. (2023). The impact of multi-labelling on food consumption confusion and choice: A double-edged sword. International Conference on Environmental Psychology, Aarhus, Denmark. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/100749